Welcome Guest
You last visited December 7, 2016, 1:12 pm
All times shown are
Eastern Time (GMT-5:00)

# Artificial Intelligence

Topic closed. 73 replies. Last post 6 years ago by martor854.

 Page 2 of 5
Los Angeles
United States
Member #75410
June 2, 2009
479 Posts
Offline
 Posted: July 6, 2010, 3:38 pm - IP Logged

Hi everyone,

Here are 3 excel formulas that I find, if that can help someone ? with diferent bits lenght, from number to binary ,but I don't have the other way arround, binary to number,if someone has it I'm interrested.

Here they are :

First one 32 bits :

=DEC2BIN((MOD(A1,4294967296)/16777216),8) & DEC2BIN(MOD(A1,16777216)/65536,8) & DEC2BIN(MOD(A1,65536)/256,8) & DEC2BIN(MOD(A1,256),8)

Second one 18 bits :

=CONCATENATE(DEC2BIN(INT(A1/512),9),DEC2BIN(MOD(A1,512),9))

Third one 12 bits :

=DEC2BIN((MOD(A1,4096)/512),3) & DEC2BIN(MOD(A1,512),9)

Hope it help ?                    Serge.

United States
Member #81843
October 31, 2009
856 Posts
Offline
 Posted: July 8, 2010, 3:43 am - IP Logged

I was taking a look at Neurolox, very interesting, it has a predictor add-on, for example to predict the result of a dog race it take one dog past data: dog's weight, the time of the day, and for the past output it takes the dog's timing in past races.
As always for artificial intelligence all is a matter of parameters,
but how could I pick up the parameters for a Pick 5 data past drawings?
Let's take number 15 for example, maybe I could take the total number of times it came out, the number of times it skipped, the position by frequency, but then what could be the output?
Past output data is needed for the training,
And then I need to take the actual output for every number and compare all the numbers to try to find the "winners"

You must have a valid question on that one to get an answer. What software do you think is good in ANN?

DD

France
Member #92435
June 7, 2010
43 Posts
Offline
 Posted: July 15, 2010, 9:30 am - IP Logged

You must have a valid question on that one to get an answer. What software do you think is good in ANN?

DD

Hi,

As for the software I use I am writing it myself, it's taking me some time though and if  there are some good software at abbordable price I might be getting it.  But see, for example, Neurolox, there must be some pre-processing of the data before using it, calculating the input parameters, and you cannot always do all that with excel formulas. (Well at least I don't know that much on excel macros)

For now I need to see first which are the good parameters or views to the problem, I am trying to find a good overall solution.

For example one good input parameter would be how many times one specific number has come out in the ten latest draws, maybe there is a good excel macro on that one, I don't know.

Imagination can take you anywhere

United States
Member #93947
July 10, 2010
2180 Posts
Offline
 Posted: July 16, 2010, 11:01 am - IP Logged

I have been using Neural Networks for years to assist in selecting stocks and thoroughbreds.  If you or anyone else can devise a NN that predicts lotto results with high accuracy on the "in sample" data, I suggest you apply the parameters derived to an "out of sample" dataset.  I am certain you will be disappointed.  Ping Pong Balls have no communication skills.

France
Member #92435
June 7, 2010
43 Posts
Offline
 Posted: July 20, 2010, 8:42 am - IP Logged

I have been using Neural Networks for years to assist in selecting stocks and thoroughbreds.  If you or anyone else can devise a NN that predicts lotto results with high accuracy on the "in sample" data, I suggest you apply the parameters derived to an "out of sample" dataset.  I am certain you will be disappointed.  Ping Pong Balls have no communication skills.

Well, yes, let's say that the word accuracy is a big one, but at least you use NN to assist, does that mean to find new tendencies in market? I've heard that some finances specialist were able to "predict" the european crisis through their own NN software, at least the output marked the lower comming tendency, it was that day when I became interested in artificial inteligence.

Well, as for me it is like a game, a passion for unsolved mysteries, if I could just find those tendencies I will be happy, rather than playing numbers blindly. The feeling that I work for it is the pleasure, sometimes it can be discouraging but most of the time it is rewarding.
;)

Imagination can take you anywhere

United States
Member #93947
July 10, 2010
2180 Posts
Offline
 Posted: July 20, 2010, 5:14 pm - IP Logged

Well, yes, let's say that the word accuracy is a big one, but at least you use NN to assist, does that mean to find new tendencies in market? I've heard that some finances specialist were able to "predict" the european crisis through their own NN software, at least the output marked the lower comming tendency, it was that day when I became interested in artificial inteligence.

Well, as for me it is like a game, a passion for unsolved mysteries, if I could just find those tendencies I will be happy, rather than playing numbers blindly. The feeling that I work for it is the pleasure, sometimes it can be discouraging but most of the time it is rewarding.
;)

The point I was trying to make, which I think you are missing, is that there are leading indicators in the stock markets, things such as earlier results of foreign markets in different time zones, volume considerations, and the provable persistance of trends, all of which give Neural Networks a possible edge.  However, when it comes to ping pong balls bouncing randomly in response to air currents, there is NO WAY to predict which one will emerge when the release button is pushed.  Unless there is fraud involved, lotteries based on random events will have NO "tendencies" to be found.  You are being misled by what is known as the "Gambler's Fallacy," which you can read all about at wikipedia.

If the Pick 3 came out straight today at 123, would you be willing to buy a ticket for 123 straight for tomorrow's game?  Why not?  The odds that 123 would come up today was 1/1000, and the odds that it will come up tommorrow is also 1/1000, exactly the same.  Which is, by the way, the same as the odds for any other of the 1000 possibilities, 1/1000.  Ping pong balls have no memories!!!

mid-Ohio
United States
Member #9
March 24, 2001
19826 Posts
Offline
 Posted: July 20, 2010, 6:49 pm - IP Logged

I thought the idea of using AI was to look at data with no perceived ideas at the beginning and allow AI to develop its own perceptions.  You make it sounds as if AI looks at data with perceived ideas and decide which ones are the most appropriate depending on trends and other information it detects in the data.  In other words a repeatable occurance that has been seen before when similiar conditions have existed.  Since exact combinations aren't likely to repeat the combination itself must be part of the repeatable event that is most likely to happen.

* you don't need to buy more tickets, just buy a winning ticket *

United States
Member #59354
March 13, 2008
3971 Posts
Offline
 Posted: July 21, 2010, 7:30 am - IP Logged

jimmy

True, trying to predict what the next set of numbers will be based on what happened in the last drawing

would be useless.  lets say I find a group of numbers that has twice as many winning tickets as any other

any other group containing the same amount of sets.  If I played from that group based on the odds I have

just as good of chance of hitting as I would any other group.  However if the group continues to out perform

the other groups then I will have a better chance of hitting a jackpot playing from that group.  This may not

be the way to plan for a early retirement, but one must see that It would be a better choice to play until the

data showed different.  Most people are looking for any thing that would improve their play and if a bias

is shown for one group vs another then what is wrong with using this.  If ones only measure of a system

is how many winning tickets are produced then we are all wasting our time.  If a system produced 10

winning tickets a year then would it be considered a good system.  Or would it need to produce at least

60% to earn a D-.  I think we should set the Bar at 99% myself and count anything less a failure.   Maybe

the best system out there is the QP system, and it is a system, it has a cpu, ram, video, keyboard, touch

screen software, storage and a very big staff all working to maintain it.   I wonder if I could hack that

super system and learn the code they use.  Then I could say here on LP that "My system beats them

all, no one has more wins then me".   But wait, wait, wait,  I may be the one that wrote the code they

use.  I remember I coded a random number generator and  had it stored on a brand new 360Kb 5.25

floppy that came up missing , it just vanished.  It all makes perfect since now they stold my friggin code

and are using it for the QP machines.  Now I am really mad.  And now that I think about it, It, was at

that very same time that they stopped the Ball Drop.  hmmmmm.

I Been hacked.....

RL

Working on my Ph.D.  "University of hard Knocks"

I will consider the opinion that my winnings are a product of chance if you are willing to consider

they are not.  Many great discoveries come while searching for something else

Trump / 2016 & 2020

United States
Member #93947
July 10, 2010
2180 Posts
Offline
 Posted: July 21, 2010, 2:20 pm - IP Logged

jimmy

True, trying to predict what the next set of numbers will be based on what happened in the last drawing

would be useless.  lets say I find a group of numbers that has twice as many winning tickets as any other

any other group containing the same amount of sets.  If I played from that group based on the odds I have

just as good of chance of hitting as I would any other group.  However if the group continues to out perform

the other groups then I will have a better chance of hitting a jackpot playing from that group.  This may not

be the way to plan for a early retirement, but one must see that It would be a better choice to play until the

data showed different.  Most people are looking for any thing that would improve their play and if a bias

is shown for one group vs another then what is wrong with using this.  If ones only measure of a system

is how many winning tickets are produced then we are all wasting our time.  If a system produced 10

winning tickets a year then would it be considered a good system.  Or would it need to produce at least

60% to earn a D-.  I think we should set the Bar at 99% myself and count anything less a failure.   Maybe

the best system out there is the QP system, and it is a system, it has a cpu, ram, video, keyboard, touch

screen software, storage and a very big staff all working to maintain it.   I wonder if I could hack that

super system and learn the code they use.  Then I could say here on LP that "My system beats them

all, no one has more wins then me".   But wait, wait, wait,  I may be the one that wrote the code they

use.  I remember I coded a random number generator and  had it stored on a brand new 360Kb 5.25

floppy that came up missing , it just vanished.  It all makes perfect since now they stold my friggin code

and are using it for the QP machines.  Now I am really mad.  And now that I think about it, It, was at

that very same time that they stopped the Ball Drop.  hmmmmm.

I Been hacked.....

RL

RL,

I suspect you didn't take my advice above and study the Gambler's Fallacy at wikipedia.

You also need to understand the concepts of Variance, Standard Deviation, and Confidence Intervals.  All of your comments above refer to short term results and based solidly in your belief in the Gambler's Fallacy.  If you REALLY believe a particular game system in your state is currently biased one way or another, you should contact your state Representatives and call for an investigation!  Before you do that however, I would first advise the following exercise so you can be convinced there really is something awry.

A revealing look at past results:

Mouse over "Games" to the left and select "Has my number ever won?"

Enter 1-1-1 in the 3 windows and Click "Go"

You should see 4 midday winners, the latest on 06/12/2010.

---The midday game is new and is the Default.

In the drop down menu, select "Daily Number (Evening)"

Enter 1-1-1 in the boxes and click "Search" (Do NOT include Boxed Results.)

Unless 111 hits between now and when you check, there should be 12 wins displayed.

Now, start checking your favorite 3 digit numbers until your heart's content!  For each display, make a note of the number of hits for that number.   You will be able to see if the number of times a particular number has hit agrees with what you would expect from probability theory, OVER 33 YEARS!  The first draw in this game was on March 1, 1977, so 33.4 Years has elapsed as of today, which is approximately 12,190 Draws.  You should find that the average number of hits for a typical number over these 33 years is around 12.  If you've found results that look fishy to you, and you're still not convinced, YOU HAVE MORE WORK TO DO!  Enter all 1000 numbers in the boxes and record the number of hits that you see for each one.  Enter this list of 1000 numbers into Excel or any statistical package and take a look at the results.  Their mean should be close to 12 and they should have a Normal Bell Shaped Distribution.  What is the Variance and Standard Deviation?  As expected for a Random Distribution?  Have fun!

P.S. My LotteryPost Thread #217181 in the Lottery Discussion Forum discusses real POTENTIAL for fraud by the Lottery IT people in the PA Millionaire Raffle.

--Jimmy

United States
Member #93947
July 10, 2010
2180 Posts
Offline
 Posted: July 21, 2010, 2:54 pm - IP Logged

I thought the idea of using AI was to look at data with no perceived ideas at the beginning and allow AI to develop its own perceptions.  You make it sounds as if AI looks at data with perceived ideas and decide which ones are the most appropriate depending on trends and other information it detects in the data.  In other words a repeatable occurance that has been seen before when similiar conditions have existed.  Since exact combinations aren't likely to repeat the combination itself must be part of the repeatable event that is most likely to happen.

RJOh,

You said,  "I thought the idea of using AI was to look at data with no perceived ideas at the beginning and allow AI to develop its own perceptions."  This is absolutely correct.  However, the kinds of parameters you allow an AI program to try to make associations among is KEY.  What assumptions are you going to make about the effect, if any, the previous results of a particular game could possibly have on future results? If you are currently designing Neural Networks you must be aware of the problem of "curve fitting."  You can take a year's worth of Lottery Game results and throw it at a NN with ARBITRARILY derived neurons and hidden layers and if you TRAIN IT LONG ENOUGH, it will come up with what appear to be miraculous results!  How?  By fitting the parameters of the solution to the data!  Your rude awakening will be when you try to apply these parameters to a completely different year's worth of data, a year your software has never seen before.  Your NN will fail miserably.  And the irony here is that the shorter the time period you choose to analyse, the easier it is for NN software to come up with a perfect fit!

You also said, "In other words a repeatable occurance that has been seen before when similiar conditions have existed."  What are these "similar conditions" in a random lottery that you are referring to?

I hope you will read my Reply to RL-RandomLogic, which should be nearby.

--Jimmy

United States
Member #93947
July 10, 2010
2180 Posts
Offline
 Posted: July 21, 2010, 3:23 pm - IP Logged

RL,

I suspect you didn't take my advice above and study the Gambler's Fallacy at wikipedia.

You also need to understand the concepts of Variance, Standard Deviation, and Confidence Intervals.  All of your comments above refer to short term results and based solidly in your belief in the Gambler's Fallacy.  If you REALLY believe a particular game system in your state is currently biased one way or another, you should contact your state Representatives and call for an investigation!  Before you do that however, I would first advise the following exercise so you can be convinced there really is something awry.

A revealing look at past results:

Mouse over "Games" to the left and select "Has my number ever won?"

Enter 1-1-1 in the 3 windows and Click "Go"

You should see 4 midday winners, the latest on 06/12/2010.

---The midday game is new and is the Default.

In the drop down menu, select "Daily Number (Evening)"

Enter 1-1-1 in the boxes and click "Search" (Do NOT include Boxed Results.)

Unless 111 hits between now and when you check, there should be 12 wins displayed.

Now, start checking your favorite 3 digit numbers until your heart's content!  For each display, make a note of the number of hits for that number.   You will be able to see if the number of times a particular number has hit agrees with what you would expect from probability theory, OVER 33 YEARS!  The first draw in this game was on March 1, 1977, so 33.4 Years has elapsed as of today, which is approximately 12,190 Draws.  You should find that the average number of hits for a typical number over these 33 years is around 12.  If you've found results that look fishy to you, and you're still not convinced, YOU HAVE MORE WORK TO DO!  Enter all 1000 numbers in the boxes and record the number of hits that you see for each one.  Enter this list of 1000 numbers into Excel or any statistical package and take a look at the results.  Their mean should be close to 12 and they should have a Normal Bell Shaped Distribution.  What is the Variance and Standard Deviation?  As expected for a Random Distribution?  Have fun!

P.S. My LotteryPost Thread #217181 in the Lottery Discussion Forum discusses real POTENTIAL for fraud by the Lottery IT people in the PA Millionaire Raffle.

--Jimmy

Sorry,

I confused things by making an error in the instructions for the PA Lottery.  The first choice you must make is to choose from the list of Games, the "Daily Number".  The above works after that.  Sorry.

--Jimmy

United States
Member #59354
March 13, 2008
3971 Posts
Offline
 Posted: July 21, 2010, 4:16 pm - IP Logged

Sorry,

I confused things by making an error in the instructions for the PA Lottery.  The first choice you must make is to choose from the list of Games, the "Daily Number".  The above works after that.  Sorry.

--Jimmy

jimmy

I don't have to read it, It is common knowledge.  I also do not have to view the PA data.

Let me ask you why you are here, do you have the urge to expound unknown wisdom

that the rest of us are lacking or are you just regurgitating something you just learnt

watching TLC.   I could say "But tell that to the person holding the winning ticket"  Life

is a gamble. Everyday you go out and get in your car and drive to wherever, you are

risking being killed of injured but you still do it.  When you eat at a buffet you are taking

a even biggier risk.  Going to the hospital to be treated is even more of a risk.  I read

a few years back that over 100,000 people died in one year from mistakes made by

medical practitioners.  It is very easy to explain the high amount of loosers when the

game has only one winner.   We know the odds but choose to play anyway.  There is

only one super bowl winner, go tell all the other teams players your findings,  maybe

they will all quit playing.  We pay a dollar to compete in the lottery, I know the odds, I

can produce the stats for any aspect of my game.   I am playing a game that cost me

\$1.00 to play,  I am not buying the winning ticket but paying the entry fee.  The Play-slip

that I fill out is not a Bet-slip.  One bets on the horses or some sporting event.  I don't

try to predict what the next set will be, I try to trap the winning set within the fewest

sets I can.  I never look at the numbers until I fill out the playslip.  I don't know what

you are attempting here, If you are saying that no one should play the lottery because

of the odds then say it and go on about your life.  You never know someone here may

not know the odds of winning a jackpot are so slim.

RL

Working on my Ph.D.  "University of hard Knocks"

I will consider the opinion that my winnings are a product of chance if you are willing to consider

they are not.  Many great discoveries come while searching for something else

Trump / 2016 & 2020

United States
Member #93947
July 10, 2010
2180 Posts
Offline
 Posted: July 21, 2010, 5:22 pm - IP Logged

jimmy

I don't have to read it, It is common knowledge.  I also do not have to view the PA data.

Let me ask you why you are here, do you have the urge to expound unknown wisdom

that the rest of us are lacking or are you just regurgitating something you just learnt

watching TLC.   I could say "But tell that to the person holding the winning ticket"  Life

is a gamble. Everyday you go out and get in your car and drive to wherever, you are

risking being killed of injured but you still do it.  When you eat at a buffet you are taking

a even biggier risk.  Going to the hospital to be treated is even more of a risk.  I read

a few years back that over 100,000 people died in one year from mistakes made by

medical practitioners.  It is very easy to explain the high amount of loosers when the

game has only one winner.   We know the odds but choose to play anyway.  There is

only one super bowl winner, go tell all the other teams players your findings,  maybe

they will all quit playing.  We pay a dollar to compete in the lottery, I know the odds, I

can produce the stats for any aspect of my game.   I am playing a game that cost me

\$1.00 to play,  I am not buying the winning ticket but paying the entry fee.  The Play-slip

that I fill out is not a Bet-slip.  One bets on the horses or some sporting event.  I don't

try to predict what the next set will be, I try to trap the winning set within the fewest

sets I can.  I never look at the numbers until I fill out the playslip.  I don't know what

you are attempting here, If you are saying that no one should play the lottery because

of the odds then say it and go on about your life.  You never know someone here may

not know the odds of winning a jackpot are so slim.

RL

You're disingenuous RL.  If the Gambler's Fallacy was "common knowledge" here,

software that banks on people not understanding it would not be pushed here.

I play the Powerball using Quick Picks because I feel the \$6 per week I spend provides

me with at least \$6 worth of entertainment, with the added bonus of the possibility

of a big jackpot.  What I don't do is waste time and money trying to beat the odds under

the mistaken belief that ping pong balls can talk to each other.  I thought I might be

able to help a few people here realize that they would have more time for productive

activities if they recognized state lotteries for what they are, Point Five Games, bought

Quick Picks, and just had fun dreaming about what they would do if they won.

Unfortunately, what I'm finding mostly are people not able to give up their belief in the

Gambler's Fallacy, and people like you who understand it, but most likely have some

vested interest in propagating ignorance.  (A purveyor of lottery software, perhaps?)

Maybe I should forget altruism and use my programming skills to compete.  Bye.

United States
Member #59354
March 13, 2008
3971 Posts
Offline
 Posted: July 21, 2010, 7:11 pm - IP Logged

You're disingenuous RL.  If the Gambler's Fallacy was "common knowledge" here,

software that banks on people not understanding it would not be pushed here.

I play the Powerball using Quick Picks because I feel the \$6 per week I spend provides

me with at least \$6 worth of entertainment, with the added bonus of the possibility

of a big jackpot.  What I don't do is waste time and money trying to beat the odds under

the mistaken belief that ping pong balls can talk to each other.  I thought I might be

able to help a few people here realize that they would have more time for productive

activities if they recognized state lotteries for what they are, Point Five Games, bought

Quick Picks, and just had fun dreaming about what they would do if they won.

Unfortunately, what I'm finding mostly are people not able to give up their belief in the

Gambler's Fallacy, and people like you who understand it, but most likely have some

vested interest in propagating ignorance.  (A purveyor of lottery software, perhaps?)

Maybe I should forget altruism and use my programming skills to compete.  Bye.

jimmy

What I don't understand is how you can invest \$6.00 for your entertainment and then turn around

and and accuse me of "propagating ignorance".  Did you never consider that I do this because I love

the chase.  The quick picks that you buy come from a system.  This system has been designed to pick

a random set of numbers.  Consider this, How much bias is used to make your QP's random.  You

cannot have any bias and not call it a system.  What If I wrote a program that picked random sets

and then played \$6.00 a week would you condemn this also.  I fully understand your point and it

shows a total lack of hope.  Balls not talking to each other has nothing to do with the sets drawn.

Even if they could talk then how would that effect which one was picked.  I don't think that you

understand as much as you think you do.  My intellect is in tact and has been tested and shown

to be quite sufficient.  Have you ever won anything with your QP's.  I have won a jackpot using

my system.  Maybe it was luck as some would infer but I don't beleive in luck.  If you have won

a jackpot using QP's I would not discredit you or your methods.  If I picked a set of numbers to

play and then mixed them with a group of random sets you would not be able to tell me which

was which.  If any set  has the exact same odds of winning within any one drawing then why

would my sets be any worse off than your QP's.  I have spent much time on LP trying to help

system players with nothing in return.  If you feel the need to help others understand, then by

all means continue.  Most people here operate in the realms of hope and faith.  You may consider

this as just another part of the  "Gambler's Fallacy"  but  I do not.  Faith and hope are real to those

that beleive.  Add to this the vision of winning and you now have the reason people work on

some sort of system to acheive.  This is the base of all human endevor and I hate to think of

where we would be without it.  The fact that most will never win a jackpot is not reason enough

to prevent one from trying and maybe this is a flaw within the human mindset.  All this being said

I think that my \$6.00 is at least as good of an investment into foolishness as your \$6.00 investment

is.

Working on my Ph.D.  "University of hard Knocks"

I will consider the opinion that my winnings are a product of chance if you are willing to consider

they are not.  Many great discoveries come while searching for something else

Trump / 2016 & 2020

United States
Member #93947
July 10, 2010
2180 Posts
Offline
 Posted: July 21, 2010, 11:44 pm - IP Logged

jimmy

What I don't understand is how you can invest \$6.00 for your entertainment and then turn around

and and accuse me of "propagating ignorance".  Did you never consider that I do this because I love

the chase.  The quick picks that you buy come from a system.  This system has been designed to pick

a random set of numbers.  Consider this, How much bias is used to make your QP's random.  You

cannot have any bias and not call it a system.  What If I wrote a program that picked random sets

and then played \$6.00 a week would you condemn this also.  I fully understand your point and it

shows a total lack of hope.  Balls not talking to each other has nothing to do with the sets drawn.

Even if they could talk then how would that effect which one was picked.  I don't think that you

understand as much as you think you do.  My intellect is in tact and has been tested and shown

to be quite sufficient.  Have you ever won anything with your QP's.  I have won a jackpot using

my system.  Maybe it was luck as some would infer but I don't beleive in luck.  If you have won

a jackpot using QP's I would not discredit you or your methods.  If I picked a set of numbers to

play and then mixed them with a group of random sets you would not be able to tell me which

was which.  If any set  has the exact same odds of winning within any one drawing then why

would my sets be any worse off than your QP's.  I have spent much time on LP trying to help

system players with nothing in return.  If you feel the need to help others understand, then by

all means continue.  Most people here operate in the realms of hope and faith.  You may consider

this as just another part of the  "Gambler's Fallacy"  but  I do not.  Faith and hope are real to those

that beleive.  Add to this the vision of winning and you now have the reason people work on

some sort of system to acheive.  This is the base of all human endevor and I hate to think of

where we would be without it.  The fact that most will never win a jackpot is not reason enough

to prevent one from trying and maybe this is a flaw within the human mindset.  All this being said

I think that my \$6.00 is at least as good of an investment into foolishness as your \$6.00 investment

is.

RL,

Would you believe, I just inadvertantly included a Link in a reply to you that I spent over an hour on?  I dealt with most of the issues in your post but I don't have the time or energy to try to re-compose it now.   Briefly, I took back my accusation of "propagating ignorance" but re-asserted my "Homework" recommendations of analysing the PA Daily Number 33 year results and the Gambler's Fallacy at wikipedia.  I said I think so-called Lottery Systems give false hope to poor people causing them to spend more than they can afford to lose and I also recommended a book:

"Fooled by Randomness" by Nicholas Taleb.

The Amazon Review I pasted in is what made my posting DISAPPEAR!  Not the Review itself (I hope!), but the four characters following the n in the word Amazon -  Here goes again!

Amazon Review

If the prescriptions for getting rich that are outlined in books such as The Millionaire Next Door and Rich Dad Poor Dad are successful enough to make the books bestsellers, then one must ask, Why aren't there more millionaires? In Fooled by Randomness, Nassim Nicholas Taleb, a professional trader and mathematics professor, examines what randomness means in business and in life and why human beings are so prone to mistake dumb luck for consummate skill. This eccentric and highly personal exploration of the nature of randomness meanders from the court of Croesus and trading rooms in New York and London to Russian roulette, Monte Carlo engines, and the philosophy of Karl Popper. Part of what makes this book so good is Taleb's ability to make seemingly arcane mathematical concepts (at least to this reviewer) entirely relevant in evaluating and understanding everything from the stock market to the success of those millionaires cited in the aforementioned bestsellers. Here's an articulate, wise, and humorous meditation on the nature of success and failure that anyone who wants a little more of the former would do well to consider. Highly recommended.

--Harry C. Edwards --This text refers to the Hardcover edition.

--Jimmy

 Page 2 of 5